Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report€¦ · Self-Evaluation Report Version 7, January 2013 ....

Website: www.eapaa.org Secretariat: Mrs. Seeta Autar University of Twente, School of Management and Governance

p.o.box 217, NL 7500 AE Enschede, the Netherlands, tel. +31-53-489-4408, e-mail [email protected]

Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report

Version 7, January 2013

EAPAA Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report, version 7, January 2013 pg. 2



EAPAA Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report Decided by the EAPAA General Meeting, Bratislava, June 15, 2001 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Granada, June 14, 2002 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Milan, Sep 5, 2006 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Madrid, Sep 19, 2007 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, St. Julian, Sep 1, 2009 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Bucharest, Sep 6, 20112009 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Bucharest, Sep 6, 2011 Amended by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee Meeting, Bergen, Sep 7, 2012, Jan.-January 2013

Table of Content General instructions for the Self-Evaluation Report .............................................................................3 Instructions for Volume I.....................................................................................................................6 Accreditation Criteria ..........................................................................................................................8 1. Preamble ........................................................................................................................................8

1.3 National educational systems ................................................................................................8 1.4 National evaluation systems ..................................................................................................8 1.5 Formal exams for entrance to civil service .............................................................................8

2. Applicability/Eligibility ..........................................................................................................9 2.1 Academic public administration degree programme .......................................................9 2.2 Geography ......................................................................................................................9 2.3 Programme longevity .................................................................................................... 10 2.4 Programme variants and locations ................................................................................ 10

3. Duration of Accreditation ................................................................................................... 10 4. Categories of Accreditation ................................................................................................ 11 5. ‘Standards’ ......................................................................................................................... 11

5.1 Domain of Public Administration ................................................................................... 11 5.2 Mission-based Accreditation ......................................................................................... 12 5.3 Level ............................................................................................................................. 14 5.4 Relation to Practice and Internships .............................................................................. 14 5.5 Curriculum .................................................................................................................... 15 5.6 Quality Improvement and Innovation ............................................................................ 20 5.7 Student Assessment ...................................................................................................... 21 5.8 Programme Jurisdiction................................................................................................. 22 5.9 Faculty .......................................................................................................................... 23 5.10 Admission of Students ................................................................................................... 26 5.11 Supportive Services and Facilities .................................................................................. 26 5.12 Student Services ............................................................................................................ 28 5.13 Public Relations ............................................................................................................. 29

6 Additional Criteria .............................................................................................................. 29 Instructions for Volume II.................................................................................................................. 30 1 Faculty Data Sheets ............................................................................................................ 30 2 Course abstracts ................................................................................................................ 31 3 List of Theses ..................................................................................................................... 31




General instructions for the Self-Evaluation Report The review and accreditation process This document provides an overview of the EAPAA Accreditation Criteria and what information is needed in the Self-Evaluation report. The EAPAA Accreditation Procedures and the EAPAA Accreditation Criteria are the official key documents governing the process. Also the EAPAA Accreditation Procedure Timeline and the EAPAA Site Visit Manual are important documents. The self-evaluation report A carefully prepared Self-Evaluation Report is a key element of the accreditation process. Preparing the report can be beneficial to the applicant programme in reviewing itself. It is essential to the review by the site visit team and the evaluation by the Accreditation Committee. To encourage comparability of information across programmes and to help provide consistency in the accreditation process, the Self-Evaluation Report should be prepared according to the format specified in these instructions. The language of the Self-Evaluation Report In order to be readable by at least a substantial number of Accreditation Committee members, the language of the Self-Evaluation Report should be English preferably, but French or German are also allowed. Organizing for self-evaluation The faculty1 of the programme is encouraged to utilise the Self-Evaluation Report writing process as an evaluative tool for analysing programme objectives and performance. Although a variety of organisational approaches are appropriate for the Self-Evaluation, all faculty assigned to the degree programme unit (as well as related faculty who teach courses for the unit) should be involved. In addition, input should be obtained from all other stakeholders ( students, alumni, other relevant academic departments and employers of programme graduates). Preparation time The preparation of the Self-Evaluation Report typically takes six months or more. The focus on mission requires the passage of time to assess performance and accomplishment of objectives and to show how information about its performance has been used in directing and revising programme objectives, strategies and operations. Collecting data, involving faculty, interacting with students and alumni and preparing the report make it difficult to prepare an effective report in a very short time. Part-time, Off-campus and distance education When part-time, off-campus and distance education versions of the programme serve different missions, student populations, or utilise educational technology or learning methods that differ from the parent programme, these differences should be described and explained fully in order to demonstrate:

the extent to which educational offerings are consistent with and contribute to the mission;

the extent to which assessment and guidance processes ensure the comparability of the education offered;

the effects of these differences on students, faculty, administrators, systems, processes, and the allocation of programme resources;

the effects of these differences on the education received by all students in the programme seeking accreditation regardless of where they are located.

1 Where in this document ‘faculty’ is used, the academic staff of the organizational unit responsible for the

programme is meant.




Due date The Self-Evaluation Report is due at the EAPAA secretariat no later than March 31. Other dates can be authorised by the EAPAA secretariat.

Self-evaluation year The Self-Evaluation year for this report is the academic year immediately preceding the year this report is submitted.

Copies and related material Only a digital version of the Self-Evaluation Report is required. No print copies are needed.

Availability of records Although they need not be submitted with the Self-Evaluation Report, other information should be available on-campus for review by the Site Visit Team. These would include documents on the mission process, assessment process results, programme development meetings, etc., Of course thesis or masters papers, and comprehensive examinations have to be available for inspection as well. Furthermore, student records, brochures, bulletins and posters used in recruiting students, as well as relevant material used in instruction.

Confidentiality of records In cases where states have promulgated complex disclosure regulations, the Self-Evaluation Report should explain these regulations and report how the programme has complied.

Degree versions All versions of the degree programme seeking accreditation must be covered in the Self-Evaluation Report. If closely related programmes are offered by the same organisational unit, using essentially the same course offerings, facilities and resources, then one integrated report may be used where the relevant differences are indicated. If there are substantial differences, it will normally be best to submit a separate Self-Evaluation Report for each programme.

Pagination and format The Self-Evaluation Report should use the identical numbering and format of the instructions (which is the same as the Accreditation Criteria). For effective reference, each page of the report should be numbered sequentially. The pages in Volume I and II may be numbered separately. (Because the sections are often prepared and duplicated separately, programmes may use the Accreditation Criterion number and number within each Accreditation Criterion: 1-1, 1-2, 4-6, etc.).




Programme mission and change The mission approach requires a mission statement and an orderly process for developing strategies and objectives, assessment with an on-going process for determining how well the mission is carried out, and guiding performance in using this information in directing and revising programme objectives, strategies and operations. On-going assessment and programme improvements are expected. Development and improvement are a normal and positive aspect of the mission approach. In the Self-Evaluation Report, the programme should present current developments and planned changes as they relate to the mission process. For purposes of determining conformity to the Accreditation Criteria, the Accreditation Committee will consider only those matters officially approved and implemented, but the plans and developments will give additional insight to the assessment. The Accreditation Committee will determine conformity in assessing the developmental process at the point the report is submitted.

Report completeness Programmes seeking initial accreditation or reaccreditation must provide complete and detailed information in the Self-Evaluation Report in order for the Accreditation Committee to determine conformity with the Accreditation Criteria. The burden of proving that the Accreditation Criteria are met rests with the programme.

Concise presentation In the interest of saving paper, costs and reading time, the Self-Evaluation Report should be submitted in a concise format. Single-spacing within the items may be used. Printing may utilise both sides of the page. While providing the necessary information, the presentation should be succinct and to the point. As said, the report should also be submitted electronically.

Accreditation criteria focus Since the review and accreditation decision will be based on the Accreditation Criteria (including the mission Accreditation Criterion), it is important for the Self-Evaluation Report to respond directly to the Accreditation Criteria themselves. The questions and points in the Self-Evaluation Report instructions elicit major elements, but the writing of the report should be guided by the detail and philosophy in the Accreditation Criteria themselves. For ease of reference, the Accreditation Criteria are included in these instructions. They are identified by italic lettering.

Different Self-Evaluation Report format If the Self-evaluation Report is used for other purposes as well (for example in a national review, audit or accreditation process) the Self-evaluation Report may follow a format adequate for this other purpose. In such a case, the programme should provide a table with the numbers of the EAPAA (sub)criteria and the paragraphs and/or pages where the relevant information to judge those (sub)criteria can be found. When necessary additional information, pertinent to the EAPAA criteria alone, should be added to this table.




Instructions for Volume I 1. Title page Prepare a title page with the following information and certifying signatures.

EAPAA SELF-EVALUATION REPORT

Date

Full Title of Degree Programme

Title of Programme Unit (college, school, department, centre, institute, etc.) Name of Institution

Complete Programme Mailing Address and Email Address

Certified By: __________________________________________________________________________________ Signature, EAPAA Representative Title Date

Certified By: __________________________________________________________________________________ Signature, Dean Title Date

2. Table of contents Provide a table of contents with page numbers for the major sections and sub-sections of the report. Please use the identical numbering format of the Accreditation Criteria and these instructions. Number each page sequentially. 3. Programme summary Provide summary information on the programme to set the context for responses to the individual Accreditation Criteria. The data should be the normal degree programme; exceptions will be handled in the discussion of each Accreditation Criterion. Programme summary

Item

Data

1. Title of degree

2. Full-time/Part-time

3. Off-Campus locations

4. Number of ECTS normally required for the degree




5. Total ECTS in required courses

6. Total ECTS in elective courses

7. Specialisations advertised as available

8. Number of ECTS which can be reduced for prior education

9. Number of ECTS which can be reduced for significant professional experience

10. Number of teaching staff (core faculty) mainly responsible for the programme (specify by rank)

11. Number of students in degree programme Full-time, Part-time, Total

12. Number of students enrolled in the self-evaluation year

Full-time, Part-time, Total

13. Is a thesis or major professional report required?

14. Is a comprehensive examination required?

15. Is an internship available? Is it required?

16. Language of the programme

17. Language of the Self-Evaluation Report English, French or German

18. Number of articles in international refereed journals produced by the core faculty in the self-evaluation year and three years before

19. Main research programmes the core faculty is involved in



Accreditation Criteria Accreditation Criteria appear in italics for reference in preparing the Self-Evaluation Report; they do not need to be repeated in the Self-Evaluation Report; just use the criteria numbering.

1. Preamble

1.3 National educational systems

The educational systems at university level in the countries who are member of the Council of Europe differ. In the accreditation system these differences will be taken into account as far as they pose constraints to the programme to fulfil the EAPAA criteria.

What constraints to the programme, especially with respect to the accreditation criteria, are the result of the national educational system requirements?

Checkpoints:

The constraints to the programme are well documented.

The consequences for the fulfilment of the EAPAA criteria are explained.

1.4 National evaluation systems

The national quality evaluation systems can put constraints on PA programmes as well. Where relevant, they will be taken into account also. Where possible, EAPAA will try to make use of the national quality evaluation system in order to minimise extra work for the EAPAA accreditation. When useful and efficient the EAPAA Accreditation Committee may decide to accept accreditation documents produced for other (national or international) quality review purposes. However, at least a explanatory note has to be produced by the programme, in which for all EAPAA criteria it is explained where the relevant information can be found.

What constraints to the programme, especially with respect to the accreditation criteria, are the result of the national quality evaluation system requirements?

Checkpoints:



When accreditation documents produced for other (national or international) quality reviewpurposes are used, the explanatory note is clear and helpful.

1.5 Formal exams for entrance to civil service

In countries who are member of the Council of Europe the systems of entrance to the Civil Service differ. In some countries formal exams must be passed. In judging PA-programmes that prepare students for such exams, the constraints these formal exams put on the programme will be taken into account.

What constraints to the programme, especially with respect to the accreditation criteria, are the result of the requirements of the systems of entrance to the Civil Service?

Checkpoints:






2. Applicability/EligibilityThe accreditation of Public Administration programmes in countries who are member of the Council of Europe assumes a commitment of the participating universities and institutes to the use of peer review procedures to assess educational quality.:

Simply state that the programme is eligible for accreditation (if it meets the criteria in Accreditation Criteria 2.1/2.3) and that it is applying for accreditation. (The specific criteria will be addressed individually in 2.1/ 2.3.)

2.1 Academic public administration degree programme

Only academic public administration degree programmes are eligible for EAPAA accreditation. The primary objective of the programme to be accredited is to provide professional academic level education leading to a formal degree. The purpose of the programme is to prepare persons for academic level roles in the public sector or academic public administration teaching or research positions. A broad variety of programme titles are considered to be subsumed under the broad term 'Public Administration' used in these EAPAA documents: 'Public Administration', 'Public Administration and Public Policy', 'Public Affairs', 'Public Management', 'Government Studies' etc. Also Political Science programmes with a clear ‘public administration orientation’ are included. The discriminating features are orientation to the public sector and training for practice in the public sector (or public administration education or research). Specialised programmes (e.g. Health Care Management) fall outside this group.

State the formal name of the programme and explain why the programme falls within the category of programmes meant in this criterion.

Checkpoints:

The objectives of the programme are clearly stated.

The objectives fall within the field of Public administration as used by EAPAA.

2.2 Geography

The university or institute, or branch thereof, providing the Public Administration programme is located in one of the member countries of the Council of Europe, or one of the countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (including Azerbaijan, Belorussia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan).

State the name of the country the university or institute, or branch thereof, providing the Public Administration programme is located.

Checkpoints:

The country where the programme is provided belongs to the countries mentioned in thisarticle.




2.3 Programme longevity

2.3.1 Normal accreditation

The programme must have been in operation at least x years (where x = the length of the programme to be accredited + 2), so there are at least two cohorts of graduates to provide adequate data for evaluating programme policies, procedures, and placement of graduates.

2.3.2 Certification for new programmes

New programmes that not yet fulfil the longevity demand of 2.3.1, can be certified as ‘peer-approved’ when the programme is designed in detail, and the organisation and means to implement the programme are available. In this case, the criteria below will be applicable as far as reasonable. When, at the moment of the site visit, the programme is one year in operation the certification will be ‘pre-accredited’.

Present the programme’s longevity, and explain that it fulfils the criterion.

Checkpoints:

The longevity of the programme fulfils the criterion for normal accreditation, respective peer-approved or pre-accredited.

2.4 Programme variants and locations

When a programme is offered in different variants (like fulltime and part-time, or distance learning), the programme has to demonstrate that all criteria are fulfilled for all variants. In the Self-evaluation Report attention must be paid to the differences between the variants. When a programme is offered at different locations, the programme has to demonstrate that all criteria are fulfilled for all locations.

Present relevant information on variants and/or different locations and what are the differences relevant for the accreditation.

Checkpoints:

Programme variants are clearly distinguished, and all relevant data are provided.

The programme demonstrates that all variants fulfil the criteria for accreditation.

The programme demonstrates that at all locations the programme delivery fulfils the criteria for accreditation.

3. Duration of Accreditation Accreditation will be granted for a seven-year period. After that, a review is required for continued accreditation. When during this period major changes in the programme (such as major changes in the duration of the programme, or the mission and/or curriculum) are being implemented, a review is needed. The necessity thereof is judged by the Accreditation Committee chair. When a review is needed, the programme may restrict the Self-evaluation Report to those criteria that are affected by the major change. Institutions need to inform the EAPAA-secretariat each two years about the changes in the curriculum and other relevant aspects of the programme. If the institution does not inform the EAPAA-secretariat timely, the EAPAA Accreditation Committee can withdraw the accreditation.




In case of a ‘new programme’ when the criterion on longevity is not fulfilled the certification will be granted until the programme meets this criterion. To become fully accredited at that moment a limited review is required. This review will see to those criteria that could not (fully) be reviewed in the original review.

Indicate (in case of first time accreditation) if certification or accreditation is sought for. In case of accreditation, indicate whether the normal period of 7 years is intended, or if not, why a shorter period is opted for. Indicate (in case of reaccreditation) whether the request for reaccreditation is due to a scheduled reaccreditation, or due to major changes in the programme. In the last case, provide information about the date(s) major changes in the programme took place.

Checkpoints in case of first time accreditation or certification

The information about accreditation or certification is clear.

The information about the duration of the intended accreditation period is clear. Checkpoints in case of a review due to major changes in the programme:

The major change and the reasons therefore are sketched.

The ‘affected’ criteria are listed and all relevant information necessary to judge the fulfilment of these criteria is provided.

4. Categories of Accreditation In order to account for large differences in the type and/or length of PA programmes, there are different categories of accreditation for which different standards will be used (if necessary) to reflect these differences in type. However, in general the same requirements will apply. Referring to the Bologna Treaty of 1999, EAPAA uses the Bachelor/Master terminology to indicate these different categories:

first cycle bachelor level public administration programmes (3 or 4 years)

second cycle graduate/master level public administration programmes (1 or 2 years)

combined/comprehensive public administration programmes (4 or 5 years, combining bachelor and master programme)

executive/mid career public administration master programmes (1 or 2 years)

Indicate the category of accreditation the programme is applying for, and give arguments therefore.

5. ‘Standards’ The accreditation standards outlined here are standards that are intended to maintain and improve the quality of Public Administration programmes. The standards are not intended to dictate curriculum or administrative specifics for each programme but are intended to provide a framework within which each programme will be evaluated. With each criterion one or more checkpoints are mentioned. These checkpoints provide a basis for the arguments and conclusions with respect to the criterion. The checkpoints are important ones, but are not exclusive; other arguments can be used as well.

5.1 Domain of Public Administration

The programme to be accredited should have as its major subject Public Administration in the broadest sense of the word. The public administration programme is multidisciplinary in character.




This embraces governance and all the aspects of management and policy that come with it, as well as the social and economic environments that affect it and are affected by it. Also it embraces the understanding of democratic values. The responsibility of the accredited programmes is not just to teach technical proficiency, but to teach Public Administration according to academic standards based on positive and normative theory and empirical research. As is stated in the Introduction of the Criteria, all kind of programme titles are intended to be subsumed under the broad term Public Administration. The Public Administration programmes should be aiming at the acquisition and application of scientific knowledge of governance. These standards apply to individual degree programmes whose purpose is to provide academic education for professional proficiency in academic level roles in the public domain.

Provide information that the programme complies with this criterion, for example by information about:

the programme objectives and/or competencies of graduates

the academic level of the programme

Checkpoints (in addition to what is described under 2.1):

The objectives cover the broad domain of public administration to an acceptable degree to be considered a public administration programme.

The objectives comply with international academic and professional norms for public administration programmes.

The programme is multidisciplinary in character.

The competencies of graduates are specific and clearly apt for the public domain.

5.2 Mission-based Accreditation

The programme should states clearly its educational philosophy and mission and have an orderly process for developing appropriate strategies and objectives consistent with its mission, resources, and constituencies. From the mission a set of credible educational objectives should be formulated. Preferably the programme objectives are translated into competencies and/or learning outcomes which the programme intends to achieve. Interpretations of the standards of this accreditation must be justified in light of the programme's mission and objectives and success in fulfilling its mission.

Background

Briefly describe the institutional setting, the historical development of the programme, the growth in enrolment and faculty size and other significant developments in the programme since its origination.

Mission Statement

State clearly the “educational philosophy and mission” of the programme and how the philosophy and mission may vary for any versions of the degree. Indicate the final qualifications a graduate should have acquired after the programme, and relates them to the mission and programme objectives. Please include the formal mission statement. Present and discuss the “strategies and objectives” and their consistency with “mission, resources and constituencies”.




[This section should focus on the mission itself. The assessment process and use in guiding performance will be covered in 5.6 and 5.7. The mission results and findings will be discussed as relevant in each Accreditation Criterion.] If not already covered explicitly in the discussion of the mission statement, describe the programme’s environment and the elements that are important and relevant. Describe the population from which students are drawn and differentiate the types of students (full-time, part-time, evening, daytime, weekend, executive, off-campus). Note other public service programmes competing in the same environment. Identify opportunities and threats relevant to the mission. If not already covered explicitly in the discussion of the mission statement, describe the internal concerns. Identify strengths, weaknesses, distinctive competencies, innovations, problems and constraints in the programme. If not already covered explicitly in the mission statement, describe how the programme objectives are translated into competencies and/or learning outcomes which the programme intends to achieve.

Mission Process

As required in Accreditation Criterion 2.1, describe the “orderly process for developing appropriate strategies and objectives”. Please discuss the processes used to develop the programme’s mission statement and the types of involvement that different stakeholders had in its development.

Deviation from Accreditation Criteria

To provide a foundation for later sections of the Self-Evaluation Report, please identify and discuss any deviations from Accreditation Criteria which are, in the eyes of the programme, justified based on the mission of the programme. [Under “Overall Evaluation of the Programme”, the Preamble (under 1.) to the Accreditation Criteria states the following: “It is recognised that programmes will have different missions and approaches to achieving excellence in Public Administration education. In arriving at an overall judgement on accreditation, consideration of substantial conformance with the standards and assessment of overall programme quality and the unique mission of that programme should be balanced.”]

Checkpoints:

The background and development of the programme and the providing institution are clearly sketched.

The mission statement is clear, concise and realistic, and is communicated to the relevant stakeholders.

The relation between the mission and the strategies and programme objectives are clearly explained.

Deviations from the EAPAA criteria are clearly argued from the mission, strategies and or programme objectives.

The intended competencies or learning outcomes, which describe the qualifications a graduate should have acquired, are clearly derived from the mission and objectives of the programme.

The educational format is clearly derived from the mission, strategies, objectives and educational philosophy of the programme.




5.3 Level

The intended learning outcomes of the programme corresponds to general, internationally accepted descriptions of the qualifications of an academic bachelor or master degree.

Provide information to proof the programme attains the level of the degree to general, internationally accepted descriptions of the qualifications of an academic bachelor or master degree (for example by relating them to the Dublin Descriptors).

Checkpoints:

The way students are brought to an academic bachelor or master level is explained and demonstrated.

The intended learning outcomes of the programme adequately cover the general characteristics of academic bachelor or master training.

The level defined by the intended learning outcomes corresponds to the Dublin descriptors of the level of the programme or to other internationally accepted level descriptors.

5.4 Relation to Practice and Internships

The Public Administration programme provides adequate training of practical skills in correspondence with the mission and the programme objectives. Therefore it has adequate links to the public administration profession.

Training of practical skills

Provide information to show how adequate training of practical skills is achieved in the programme. If an internship is not part of the training of practical skills, explain why not. Indicate how adequate and regular links to the public administration profession are maintained for this purpose.

Internship Design

Explain the purpose of the internship experience in terms of the programme’s mission, including how it is integrated with other parts of the curriculum and when it is done. Describe the duration of involvement and the kind of activities in which the intern engages.

Internship Status

Explain whether the internship is voluntary or required in the programme. Are there any prerequisites for participation in an internship? Describe the basis (formula) for granting academic ECTS for the internship. How are grades determined when internship credit is given?

Supervision of the practical training

Describe the supervision provided by the programme faculty and by agency personnel for the practical training. Are regular site visits by programme personnel required in case of an internship? How is the practical training and internship programme co-ordinated?




Internship Placement

Describe the general placement experience in internships. Indicate the number of intern placements over the last four years. List the placements of all interns during the Self-Evaluation year, indicating length of placement, hours per week, and credit earned. What criteria are used for matching students with available locations and who does the matching? Explain any arrangements for remuneration of interns, including who makes the payments to the students.

Checkpoints:

The intended learning outcomes are also based on requirements made by the relevant public administration professional field.

The adequate training of practical skills is demonstrated in the programme.

When an internship is part of the programme, the specifications of criteria for the internship places and assignments for the students are clear and relevant.

The programme provides adequate academic supervision of the training of practical skills.

The programme has adequate and regular links to the public administration profession.

5.5 Curriculum

5.5.1 Curriculum Content

The curriculum should express the general idea of public administration as a multidisciplinary field of study, with the purpose of preparing students for professional academic level roles in the public sector in democratic and legal states and/or academic public administration teaching or research positions. All components of the curriculum should be justified with respect to their quality and consistency with the mission of the programme. The programme follows the developments in the public administration field of science. This should be demonstrated by explicitly linking the mission and programme objectives with the curriculum components. Components also can be covered through explicit entry requirements for the programme.

A. Curriculum and mission

Relate Accreditation Criterion 5.5 on curriculum to mission as an overview for this section. In particular, explain how the purpose of the curriculum is to “prepare students for professional academic level roles in the public sector in democratic and legal states”. How do curriculum components, required courses (common curriculum components), elective courses (additional curriculum components), general competencies, minimum degree requirements and internships correlate with the programme’s mission? Please list and justify any deviations from Accreditation Criterion 5.5 based on the programme’s mission.

B. Background information

So that EAPAA Accreditation Committee can understand the information provided in the following sections, please provide background information: 1. Credit system: Identify whether the institution uses the semester, trimester, quarter or

other system. 2. Length of term: Report the length of term (semester, etc.) from first class meeting to

final examination. 3. Number of terms: Report the number of terms (semester, etc.) per academic year and

per calendar year. 4. Hours of work: Report the number of hours per year a full-time student is supposed to

devote to his study.




5. Full-time status: Report the institutional definition of full-time graduate student in ECTS per term. What is the minimum number of ECTS which can be taken as a full-time student and what is the normal maximum number of ECTS which can be taken?

6. Time limitation: Report the time limitation in years within which the degree must be completed.

7. Class contact hours: Report the typical class contact hours per term (semester, etc.) for x, y, z-ECTS- courses (where x, y, z are numbers most used in your curriculum).

C. Prerequisites

Report the prerequisites for entrance to the programme. When different target groups have different prerequisites, specify. 1. What are the general prerequisites (for example secondary school level or bachelor

degree) 2. What are the (public administration) specific requirements (for example “knowledge of

research methods” or “knowledge of public administration history” or “public administration bachelor”)

3. Are there prerequisites with respect to public administration experience? 4. Can candidates ‘repair’ lacunas in their prerequisites, and if so, specify the regulations

and procedure thereof.

D. Course distribution

To provide an overview, complete the following chart showing the distribution of course ECTS among the various categories in the different years. When there are specialisations, provide information for each of them.

Course Level

Core Public Administration Curriculum Components

Additional Curriculum Components

Total

Required

Choice

Year 1

Year 2

………

Total

E. Assessment and guiding performance

Explain how both the core and other curriculum components “are assessed as to their quality and consistency with the stated mission of the programme”. Report the elements relevant to curriculum measured in the assessment process and report the use of such information in guiding programme operation. Report and discuss the substantive findings or outcomes related to programme curriculum--that is, provide the results used by the programme and that will be useful to EAPAA Accreditation Committee in evaluating the curriculum.

Checkpoints:

The link between the mission, programme objectives, and curriculum characteristics is made explicit and is ‘reasonable’.

The relation between the programme objectives and the core programme components and specialisations is clearly and explicitly argued.




The intended learning outcomes are adequately translated into learning targets for the programme components.

The programme is multidisciplinary in character: relevant core concepts and theories in the disciplines of economics, law, political science and sociology are taught in the programme.

The way multidisciplinarity is achieved in the programme is demonstrated.

The programme incorporates teaching in current academic public administration theories

5.5.1.1 Core components

The core curriculum provides a thorough teaching of the basic concepts, theories, methods and history (classics) of Public Administration on the level of the programme (bachelor or master). The curriculum components are designed to produce professionals capable of intelligent, creative analysis and communication, and action in the public sector. Courses taken to fulfil the core curriculum components provide research methods, concepts and theories from the disciplines of economics, law, political science, sociology, public finances, informatisation, and public management as well as the relationship between these fields. Students are obliged to give adequate proof of their ability to work independently (under the supervision of a supervisor) on ‘real’ problems or research questions in the public sector, for example through essays and final papers (e.g. a thesis), adapted to the level (bachelor or master) of the programme. The core curriculum components enhances the student's values, knowledge, and skills to act ethically and effectively.

These requirements do not prescribe specific courses. Neither do they imply that equal time should be spent on each discipline or that the organizational unit responsible for the programme must offer all courses. Nor should they be interpreted in a manner that might impede the development of special strengths in each programme.

A. Core curriculum courses

List the core curriculum courses (course number, title, ECTS). State the conditions under which any of these courses may be waived or other courses substituted for them. If there are options among the required courses, explain those options clearly and describe the criteria by which students follow each option. Discuss any variances with the common core curriculum components which support the unique mission of the programme.

B. Basics of Public Administration

Describe how the curriculum components “provide a thorough teaching of the basic concepts, theories, methods and history (classics) of Public Administration”, and “provide concepts, theories and research methods from the disciplines of economics, law, political science and sociology, as well as the relationship between these fields”. Also describe how the curriculum components provide training in “public finances, informatisation, and public management”.

C. Capable professionals

Describe how the curriculum components are “designed to produce professionals capable of intelligent, creative analysis and communication, and action in the public sector”.

D. Ability to work independent on real problems

Describe how the curriculum components provide proof that students’ “ability to work independently on ‘real’ problems or research questions in the public sector”.




E. Ethical and effective behaviour

Describe how the curriculum components enhances “the student's values, knowledge, and skills to act ethically and effectively”.

F. Specialisations

List the specialisations. For each speciality that is listed in the university catalogue, programme brochures, or promotional material, provide the following information: (If there are no programme specialities, please so state.) 1. With reference to the programme mission, describe the specific objectives for the

speciality, the main categories of students to be served, the number of students enrolled in each speciality area, and how the curriculum provides an understanding of the speciality.

2. List the speciality area courses beyond the core curriculum. Include course number, course title, ECTS, recent dates offered (to show availability) and faculty. Clearly identify the elective courses taught within the programme being reviewed and those offered by other units.

Checkpoints:

The relation between the core components and the intended learning outcomes of the programme is clear.

The core components of the programme cover the basic concepts, theories, methods and history of Public Administration and its grounding disciplines.

The core components of the programme are adequate for the level of the programme.

The core components train students for intelligent, creative analysis and communication, and action in the public sector.

The core components enhance the student's values, knowledge, and skills to act ethically and effectively

The mastering of relevant research methods is part of the programme.

5.5.1.2 Other components and specializations

The programme clearly defines its objectives for additional work and the rationale for the objectives, and explains how the curriculum is designed to achieve these objectives. The statement of objectives includes any programme specialisation or concentration and the main categories of students to be served (e.g., pre-service, in-service, full-time, part-time).

A. Other courses

List the other curriculum courses (course number, title, ECTS).

B. Objectives

Describe the objectives for the other components of the curriculum.

C. Rationale

Describe the rationale for the other components of the curriculum in the light of the mission of the programme.

D. Specialisation

Provide evidence that key courses in the specialisation or concentration are offered on a regular basis by qualified faculty, and that these are not substitutes for the core curriculum components.




Checkpoints:

The relation between the other components and/or specialisations and intended learning outcomes of the programme is clear.

The place, objectives and target group of specialisations is clear.

5.5.1.3 Structure and didactics of the programme

The programme is coherent in its contents. The didactic concepts is in line with the aims and objectives of the programme. The teaching methods corresponds to the didactic philosophy of the programme. The programme is ‘doable’ in the formal time foreseen for the programme in the respective years.

Explain the relation between the elements of the programme, and between the programme objectives and the intended learning outcome at the one hand, and the programme on the other. Provide information about which learning methods are used in which part of the programme. Explain how you are sure that the programme can be studied in the time foreseen.

Checkpoints:

The programme is coherent in its contents and scheduling.

The didactic concepts are in line with the aims and objectives and intended learning outcomes of the programme and are realised in the programme.

The teaching methods in the programme components correspond to the didactic concept.

There is ‘proof’ that the programme is ‘do-able’ in the time foreseen.

5.5.1.4 Intake

The structure, contents and the didactic of the programme are in line with the qualifications of the students that enter into the programme. The entrance requirements are carefully checked before students start the programme. When candidates are allowed to ‘repair’ lacunas in the entrance prerequisites, a clear procedure is available.

Make plausible that there is a fit between the characteristics of the programme and the qualifications of the students entering the programme. Describe the intake procedures, including the procedure for repairing lacunas in the entrance prerequisites.

Checkpoints:

The structure, contents and the didactic of the programme are in line with the qualifications of the students that enter into the programme.

The entrance requirements of the programme adequately represent the qualifications needed.

The intake procedure is clear, including the procedure for repairing lacunas in the entrance prerequisites.

5.5.2 Length

The curriculum length is in line with the objectives of the programme and in accordance with the accreditation category that is applied for.




Provide information that the programme is in compliance with this criterion.

Checkpoints:

The length of the programme is in line with the objectives of the programme.

The length of the programme in accordance with the accreditation category that is applied for.

5.5.3 Results

The final qualifications that have been achieved by the graduates of the programme meet the intended learning outcomes of the programme. Graduates are able to operate adequately in the public administration field.

Provide proof that the intended learning outcomes are realised in the programme, and that the graduates are able to operate in the public administration field adequately.

Checkpoints:

The content and level of graduation projects are in line with the level of the degree awarded.

The programme provides proof that the final qualifications that have been achieved by the graduates of the programme meet the intended learning outcomes of the programme.

The programme provides proof that the graduates of the programme are able to operate adequately in the public administration field in appropriate functions.

5.6 Quality Improvement and Innovation

5.6.1 Programme accomplishment

The programme assesses the accomplishment of its objectives; it uses information about its performance in directing and revising programme objectives, strategies, and operations regularly. The primary concern of these standards is to achieve high quality professional education for persons entering public service. Flexibility and innovation in curriculum design and means of delivery are necessary in order to meet the diverse educational needs of (full-time and sometimes part-time) students, pre-entry and (if applicable) in-career students, students who are changing careers and students with interests in different career specialities in public affairs/policy/administration. Assessment procedures and measures may take any form appropriate to the programme and its circumstances, but each programme should develop and use procedures to determine how well it carries out its mission.

Describe in what way(s) the programme assesses its accomplishments, and how this information is used to direct and revise programme objectives, strategies, and operations regularly.

Checkpoints:

An adequate periodic system of programme monitoring is in use.

Programme components are monitored on a regular basis as part of the programme monitoring.

5.6.2 Curriculum Development

The Public Administration programme provides evidence of an adequate process of curriculum development in which all relevant stakeholders are involved.




The content of a curriculum and the means of communication and teaching changes over time. Flexibility, and the ability to innovate on the basis of adequate information on governance and teaching skills are important features of any educational programme, in order to meet the need of the students and the teaching staff.

Describe how the programme innovates itself, and what information from which sources are used in this process. As appropriate, reference should be made to measures of quality such as summaries of course evaluations, exit interviews, graduate surveys and related information. Identify efforts to improve the programme, teaching methods, course content, and innovative curricula development.

Checkpoints:

An adequate periodic process of programme development is in use.

The results of the programme monitoring are used for the revise of the programme and its components.

All relevant stakeholders (like staff, students, alumni, professional field) are involved in the programme development process.

5.6.3 External reviews

The Public Administration programme provides evidence that the recommendations received during previous reviews (by EAPAA or any other (inter)national review body) have lead to changes in the content or the organisation of the programme.

Provide information on previous reviews and their recommendations, and what actions have been taken as a result of that.

Checkpoints:

The actions taken on previous recommendation have been adequate.

5.7 Student Assessment

The programme assesses individual performance of its students. The programme evaluate the students’ performance in a substantive way with respect to the objectives of the curriculum. The programme provides adequate feedback to the student.

Provide information on the ways the programme assesses individual performance of students, and how these relate to the programme objectives.

Checkpoints:

The tests, evaluations and examinations provide an adequate check on attainment of the intended learning outcomes of the programme.

The tests, evaluations and examinations are in line with the educational philosophy of the programme.

The tests, evaluations and examinations are in line with the content and learning objectives of the various programme components.

The programme provides adequate and timely feedback for individual students.

The tests, evaluations and examinations are adequately organised and supervised by an examination committee.




5.8 Programme Jurisdiction

Within the framework of institutional organisation, responsibility for the programme in Public Administration rests with an identifiable person or group of persons, chosen according to the rules of the organisation. Within the framework of organisation and process peculiar to the institution, the faculty and/or administrator exercises initiative, and substantial determining influence with respect to important aspects of the programme. Effective Public Administration programmes may exist in several forms - sometimes as an autonomous faculty, department, school or institute, sometimes as an accountable portion of some larger unit. Recognising wide variations in university structures, the intent is to achieve an appropriate focus of attention, direction, and accountability for the programme without prescribing any particular form of organisation.

Administrative arrangement

Diagram and describe the organisation of the unit being reviewed within the administrative structure of the institution or campus. Please note any formal or informal agreements or arrangements which are relevant to this Accreditation Criterion. Describe any relationships and joint agreements between the programme and other academic units at the parent or other institutions.

Programme Structure

Diagram and describe the internal organisation of the programme, including the title of the head and the number of full-time faculty administratively assigned to or rostered in it. Report how the programme is recognised or administratively understood at the next levels of university organisation.

Programme Management

Indicate who is responsible for direct administration of the programme. Describe organisational arrangements within the unit and its constituent elements (department, programme committee, etc.) and positions (unit or department chair, programme director, etc.). Describe the nature and degree of faculty consultation in appointment of the administrator.

Determining Influence

Explain the authority, participation, “initiative and substantial determining influence” that the programme unit head and faculty nucleus (as listed in Accreditation Criterion 5.9.1) have in decisions involving the following:

general programme policy and planning

degree requirements

new courses and curriculum changes

admissions (if applicable)

certification of degree candidates

course scheduling and teaching assignment

use of financial and other resources

appointment, promotion, and tenuring of programme faculty (if applicable).

Checkpoints:

The place of the programme within the wider institutional and organisational context is clear, and does not hinder effective and efficient programme delivery and quality assurance.




The way the programme is managed is clear, and secures effective and efficient programme delivery and quality assurance.

The person(s) with responsibility for the programme has substantial influence with respect to:

o general programme policy and planning o degree requirements o new courses and curriculum changes o admissions (if applicable) o certification of degree candidates o course scheduling and teaching assignment o use of financial and other resources o appointment, promotion, and tenuring of programme faculty (if applicable).

5.9 Faculty

5.9.1 Faculty nucleus (core faculty)

There is an identifiable faculty nucleus that accepts primary responsibility for the programme; this responsibility is recognised at the next higher level of the organisation. This regular faculty consists of a sufficient number of faculty significantly involved with the programme to support the teaching responsibilities. The institution specifies how each regular faculty member is involved in the teaching and the related research and service aspects of the programme. For this purpose, anyone who is involved in delivering and organising the programme (involvement in the sense of being co-responsible for the quality of the programmes as a whole), can be counted (for the proportion of their time devoted to the programme), irrespective the place of their formal position.

Number of faculty and Critical Mass

In judging whether the programme has achieved a “sufficient number of faculty”, discuss factors such as the faculty course load, the depth and breadth of professional interest represented by the faculty, the opportunities for professional interaction among the faculty, and the opportunities for students to be exposed to the appropriate range of content areas within major programmes of study.

Faculty

For the Self-Evaluation year, provide a summary listing (according to the format below) for the faculty members employed by the institution who have primary responsibility for the programme being reviewed.

Name Rank &Title

(order by rank) Tenure Status

Parttime/fulltime Administrative Unit Degree & Field

Teaching Assignments

For each faculty member, list the sections of required and elective courses taught in the programme during the Self-Evaluation year and the preceding year. (Use the following format.)




Name of Faculty Academic Year Course # Course ECTS Title

Checkpoints:

The amount of staff is sufficient to ensure that the programme is provided to the required standards for the actual number of students.

The specifications of each staff member’s tasks are clear to all involved.

5.9.2 Faculty qualifications

A substantive percentage of the professional faculty nucleus actively involved in the programme holds an earned doctorate or other equivalent terminal academic degree in their field. Any faculty lacking the terminal degree must have a record or sufficient professional or academic experience directly relevant to their assigned responsibilities. The field of expertise and experience of the faculty reflects the needed expertise to deliver the programme as intended. All faculty with teaching assignments have at least proven basic educational skills. The educational skills are adapted to the didactics of the programme and its components. Where practitioners teach courses, there is satisfactory evidence of the quality of their academic qualifications, professional experience, and teaching ability. A sufficient number of the staff is actively involved in public administration research activities. The programme on Public Administration requires a certain faculty size, specialised personnel, and faculty quality in instruction, research and service.

Faculty quality Faculty Data Sheets

For all core faculty members (= teaching staff of core courses and programme management), provide a faculty data sheet following the instructions at the end of this document. These data sheets can be presented in an annex. Present a list of international and/or foreign conferences in the public administration domain your core faculty have attended during the last 4 years.

Promotion and Tenure

Describe the institutional and programme criteria for promotion and tenure of faculty. Describe the procedures for promotion and tenure and report on recent experience.

Research

Present a short overview of the research programme(s) the core faculty is/was involved in during the last 4 years. Especially present international and national interuniversity research projects. Present a list of scientific publications (books and articles in journals) in foreign languages of your core faculty published during the last 4 years. Present a list of scientific publications (books and articles in journals) in your home language of your core faculty published during the last 2 years.

Experience and Service

Present evidence of the experience and/or involvement of your core faculty in relevant public administration practice.




Instruction by practitioners

Provide the number and percent of required and elective courses for the programme taught by practitioners during the past two years. (This category includes anyone who is not an academic employee of the institution.) Provide a summary listing of all practitioners who taught for the programme being reviewed during the last two years. Please use the following format:

Name Academic Year Job Title and

Agency Course (ECTS) Degree & Field

of expertise

Quality of instruction

Describe the procedures for promoting and maintaining quality of instruction of faculty members.

Checkpoints:

The percentage of the staff faculty holding an earned doctorate or other equivalent terminal academic degree is sufficient.

The quality of the staff faculty (level and range of specialisms and experience) is sufficient to realise the programme.

The educational skills of the faculty is sufficient to realise the programme as intended.

A sufficient number of the staff faculty is actively involved in public administration research activities.

A sufficient number of the staff faculty is actively involved in public administration international conferences

5.9.3 Diversity: gender and minorities

The programme strives for a balanced percentage of men and women among their (professional) staff, which is in accordance with the principles of gender equality as specified by the higher education institution hosting the programme. When this is an issue in the wider society or when the institution or programme wishes so, the programme strives for a percentage of persons among their staff, which is in accordance with the societal targets.

Provide data on the percentage of women among the professional staff and in the higher level positions of the national workforce. When an issue, provide data about the percentage of persons of specific groups among the professional staff.

Checkpoints:

The programme has a clear and attainable policy to realise a balanced (professional) staff.

The percentage of men and women in the professional staff is balanced and in accordance with the policy.

When applicable: the percentage of persons from specific groups among the staff, is in accordance with the societal or institutional targets.




5.10 Admission of Students

Admission goals, admission policy and admission standards, including academic prerequisites, are in line with the mission and programme objectives. They are clearly and publicly stated, specifying any differences for pre-service, in-service or other categories of students. The programme strives for a balanced percentage of men and women among its students, which is in accordance with the principles of gender equality as specified by the higher education institution hosting the programme.

Mission, assessment and guiding performance

Relate Accreditation Criterion 5.10 on admission of students to the programme mission as an overview for this section. In particular, discuss how admission goals and standards, and admission factors correlate with programme mission. Report elements relevant to admission and subsequent progress of students in the mission statement, matters evaluated in the assessment process, and the use of the information in guiding programme operation. Describe use of the mission process and any findings or outcomes related to admissions.

Admission Process

Describe the admission process for the programme. Note any differences with respect to full-time or part-time students, pre-service or in-service. Discuss special admission practices, such as for students with non-traditional backgrounds, transfers, minorities, women and individuals with disabilities.

Diversity

Give the percentage of men and woman among the student population. Describe the programme’s policy with respect to gender equality among the students.

Checkpoints:

Admission goals, admission policy and admission standards, including academic prerequisites, are in line with the mission and programme objectives.

Appropriate entrance requirements exists for all target groups, and checks are carried out to ensure that entrants meet these requirements.

The information given to potential entrants provides an adequate and realistic picture of the programme and the career perspectives after graduation.

There is a clear policy to realise gender equality among the students.

5.11 Supportive Services and Facilities

The accommodation and material facilities are adequate to realize the programme in an effective and efficient way.

Budget Process

Briefly describe the budget process, including by whom and when the budget is prepared and the participation by the head of the programme being reviewed.




Budget Sufficiency

Describe the budget support that has been provided over the past four years for the programme being reviewed. Please provide information noting amount of funding, source, distribution and trends (a table may be used). Respond to the concern in the Accreditation Criterion whether the programme has “financial resources sufficient to support its stated objectives”.

Library Support

Describe the services provided by the library to public affairs and administration students and faculty. Provide information on the adequacy of the library collection relevant to the programme being reviewed, such as the size of collection relevant to public administration, list of relevant journals, access to electronic data bases, etc. Note ways through which access is facilitated.

Library Programme Role

Describe the degree and methods of co-ordination between the library and programme faculty in areas of acquisition, instruction and research.

Support staff

Describe the secretarial and clerical assistance available to programme faculty and administration. Describe other non-faculty support personnel such as placement director or development officer.

Computer Support

Describe computer facilities, services and equipment, for both students and faculty.

Audio-Visual Support

Describe audio-visual support and instructional equipment, including audio and visual equipment, tapes and films, visual aid devices, and distance learning arrangements.

Offices

Describe office arrangements for faculty primarily responsible for the programme. Note adequacy of office space and include the percentage with private offices. Describe the provisions made for part-time faculty office space.

Classrooms

Describe the adequacy of total overall classroom space and types of classrooms available for the programme’s courses. Please note the appropriateness of classroom arrangements for programme and class types and needs.

Checkpoints:

Budget. The programme has financial resources sufficient to support its stated objectives.

Library Services. All students and faculty have reasonable access to library facilities and services that are recognised as adequate. This would normally include texts, monographs, periodicals, serials, pamphlets, and research reports. The programme faculty has a major role in selecting library acquisitions for its programme.

Support Staff. Adequate secretarial, technical and clerical personnel is available to enable the programme to meet its educational objectives.




Classrooms. Appropriate classrooms are available for the courses being offered with the intended didactic. This would normally include rooms suitable for seminars, case discussions, simulation exercises, and lectures.

Instructional Equipment. Programme faculty and students have access to appropriate equipment for coursework and research, including computer facilities, visual aid devices, audio and videotapes and films.

Faculty Offices. The offices for faculty provide adequate space and privacy for student counselling, course preparation, and other faculty responsibilities.

ICT-facilities. The ICT-facilities for students and staff are adequate and sufficiently accessible.

5.12 Student Services

Student services are adequate in relation to the mission of the programme. Programme advisement, progress appraisal and career guidance are available to students. The programme has a clear policy and adequate means to keep student attrition to a minimum.

Advising System

Describe the process used to advise and counsel students, particularly with respect to programme advisement, course selection, and academic progress. Note any special programmes for minorities, women and persons with disabilities. Relate the advising system to the mission of the programme

Student Attrition

Briefly discuss the record of student attrition and programme efforts at retention. Determine (either by tracking a complete entry cohort from several years prior to the Self-Evaluation year, or by constructing a sampling procedure to produce similar data) the number of students for the following table. Provide information separate for full-time and part-time students. If the institution does not distinguish between full-time and part-time, the categories may be combined.

Year

of entry

Number of Students

that enrolled

% of students

that dropped

out

% of students still in the programme

% of students with degree after (programme

length +1) years


length +2) years


length +3) years

SE-6

SE-5

SE-4

SE-3

SE-2

SE-1

SE

SE= Self-Evaluation year Placement Assistance

Describe the career guidance and job placement services available through the parent institution and the programme unit to the students in the programme being reviewed.

Checkpoints:

The registration of the student’s progress is effective, informative and up to date.

The programme monitors the student attrition and uses this information to advise students as well as to develop the programme.




The information to the students about the programme and its execution (e.g. rosters) is adequate and timely.

A system of student tutoring is operative and functions adequately.

The students services meet the need of the students.

5.13 Public Relations

The programme should provide future students and others with adequate information on the programme.

Provide information on the adequacy of the information about the programme to future students and others.

Checkpoints:

The public relations of the programme sketches an adequate and honest picture of the programme, its mission, objectives, target groups, educational philosophy and results

6 Additional Criteria At the request of the programme other criteria can be applied in the evaluation, if the EAPAA Accreditation Committee agrees to do so

Present material relevant to additional criteria if applicable

Checkpoints:

The checkpoints for additional criteria are to be decided upon by the EAPAA Accreditation Committee and discussed with the programme.




Instructions for Volume II Volume II includes information on individual faculty and individual courses. Faculty data sheets and course abstracts are to be prepared according to the following instructions. Table of Contents Volume II should include a table of contents, the pages should be numbered sequentially for easy reference, and the volume should be bound securely. With the permission of the EAPAA secretariat, Volume II can be presented electronically only. In this case the programme has to provide easy access to these files during the site visit.

1 Faculty Data Sheets Provide a faculty data sheet for all core faculty members in alphabetical order. Content for Faculty Data Sheets Faculty data sheets must include the following information. (If there is no activity under a particular subhead, enter "None".) The faculty data sheet is designed as a summary and should be limited to four pages per faculty member. 1) Name, academic rank and title, date of appointment. 2) Academic degrees:

a) Name of doctoral degree, institution, date, major field of study, and dissertation title. b) Name of master's degree, institution, date, major field of study. c) Name of bachelors degree, institution, date, major field of study.

3) Primary teaching areas and teaching experience at programme level and higher (include institutions and dates).

4) Publications in international refereed journals or books in foreign languages: Articles, books, monographs, manuals, reports or other published material published in the Self-Evaluation year and three preceding years. Other selected significant publications in earlier years.

5) Research: Research projects undertaken in the Self-Evaluation year and three preceding years, note sponsors, funded or unfunded, research product and dates.

6) Significant practitioner experience, with organisations, titles, dates, and duties. 7) Involvement in international academic and professional associations. 8) Selected involvement in public service activities. 9) Selected consulting activities with nature of assignment and dates. Alternative Format: The faculty data sheet format is designed to elicit required information, to be concise and succinct, to keep paper and postage costs to a minimum, and to allow comparison in a Accreditation Criterion format. Although EAPAA Accreditation Committee prefers the Accreditation Criterion format, programmes may submit faculty vitae but only if they contain the information requested and if they are about the same number of pages. Since most vitae are on word processors, faculty should edit their vitae to conform to four pages.




2 Course abstracts Course Categories Provide a course abstract for all courses listed in the following categories (in this order):

1. Required courses in numerical order. 2. Elective Courses offered primarily for students in the programme being reviewed, in

numerical order. Content for course abstracts Each abstract shall contain the information in the following format. The abstract for each course is limited to four pages. Please do not omit any of the subheadings; state "None", if appropriate. (Note: Complete syllabi of all courses should be available for review by members of the site visit team).

1. Course number, title, and ECTS. 2. Course instructors during Self-Evaluation year and site visit year. 3. Prerequisites for the course. 4. Course objectives in relation to total curriculum. 5. Course description. 6. Major topics covered. 7. Prescribed books and readings. 8. Way of examining

[Alternative Format: The course abstract format is designed to elicit required information, to be concise and succinct, to keep paper and postage costs to a minimum, and to allow comparison in a Accreditation Criterion format. Although EAPAA Accreditation Committee prefers the Accreditation Criterion format, programmes may submit abstracts from course syllabi but only if they contain the information requested and if they are about the same number of pages. Since most syllabi are on word processors, faculty should edit the abstracts to conform to four pages.]

3 List of Theses A List of titles of theses (with English translation of those titles) from the last 3 years including their final mark. From this list the site visit team chair will choose five theses for further inspection before the site visit. The five chosen theses must be sent in electronic format to the EAPAA secretariat.

Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report€¦ · Self-Evaluation Report Version 7, January 2013 ....

Documents

Transcript of Guidelines for the Self-Evaluation Report€¦ · Self-Evaluation Report Version 7, January 2013 ....